Damn, I really like Windows 7

jibbajabba

Just installed Build 7077 and it really feels like the better Vista

But once again - the Experience Index doesn't really make sense (to me at least):



Especially the Primary Hard Disk performance is 'weird'.

The system in question runs on 15k rpm SAS disks in Raid0 .. Using Seagate disks which are not yet released (and about 15% quicker than the ones currently available).

I guess to get a "good" score you need like $1400 SSDs from Intel

d00dle

look exactly like Vista.

HeroPsycho

d00dle wrote: »

look exactly like Vista.

Get ready to laugh when the Vista haters begin raving about Windows 7.

paintb4707

d00dle wrote: »

look exactly like Vista.

It pretty much is. I didn't see anything fantastic about it. The task bar didn't really amaze me either, I'll stick with the original.

JDMurray

Windows 7 is Windows Vista with a newer shell and a few other performance and usability improvements. Using Vista as the bottom 80% of Windows 7 is how MS is able to get another turn of Windows out so quickly. Vista was largely a marketing failure rather than a technical failure (Vista is more of a technical annoyance, really).

I've been using the Windows 7 beta since it was first "leaked" and I like it quite a lot. I may actually move to it before the release of Windows 7 Service Pack 1.

vanquish23

Looks like everyone is falling for another rip off from Micrsoft.

gorebrush

Windows 7 will be good, but why are they still giving people the option to downgrade to XP when it comes out?

Microsoft know that they will have an EXTREMELY tough time convincing users/businesses to upgrade for Windows 7. (As was the case for Vista)

From a business point of view, can anyone really sensibly argue a good case to invest thousands in hardware for the sake of a flashy UI?

shednik

gorebrush wrote: »

Windows 7 will be good, but why are they still giving people the option to downgrade to XP when it comes out?

Microsoft know that they will have an EXTREMELY tough time convincing users/businesses to upgrade for Windows 7. (As was the case for Vista)

From a business point of view, can anyone really sensibly argue a good case to invest thousands in hardware for the sake of a flashy UI?

+1...I don't this I could have said it any better then this, I personally don't care too much for vista in the business sense because I have no use for the nice gui effects. For home use however I can see alot of people going for it, I mean I know a lot of people who went to a mac because it was prettier! MS knows that and is trying to add that to their feature set. It didn't work as well in vista but it seems they have improved in Windows 7. I feel they should make the equivelant to XP Pro less resource intensive so the businesses will be able to run it on decent hardware and still preform the tasks needed to do ones job.

dynamik

Why does everyone act like Vista is nothing more than a UI update?

There are dozens of new features, and some are pretty cool. If all your job requires of you is basic work with Word, Excel, and a web browser, I could see those not making a difference. For more advanced users, especially mobile users, there are beneficial additions.

JDMurray

gorebrush wrote: »

Windows 7 will be good, but why are they still giving people the option to downgrade to XP when it comes out?

Once again, Windows Vista was primarily a marketing failure, so they are giving people who decide that they don't like Windows 7 an easy downgrade path back to WinXP. This should keep people from talking too much needless trash about Windows 7 if they don't like it. The "Vista sucks" word-of-moth campaign by people who never even tried it had devastating effects on the long-term sales of Vista. MS doesn't want the same thing to happen with Windows 7.

dynamik wrote: »

Why does everyone act like Vista is nothing more than a UI update?

Because it mostly is. I attended a Microsoft technical preview of Windows 7 and the changes are mostly about the perceived performance increase of the GUI, ease-of-use for security, and new GUI feature (e.g., AeroShake) found in the upper-most layers of the Windows 7 OS. These are the changes that MS is pushing right now.

The majority of the guts of Windows 7 are unchanged from Windows Vista and Server 2008, and that is perfectly fine with me. As a software engineer, I don't want to start over with a brand new Windows codebase full of bugs like I had to with Vista. I also do not want yet-another-release-of-Windows to test my software on. Windows 7 will look like Windows Vista to my software, and I'm very thankful for that. I know that if my software correctly runs on Vista Ultimate it has a very good chance of also running correctly on Windows 7 and Server 2008.

vanquish23 wrote: »

Looks like everyone is falling for another rip off from Micrsoft.

Until you write something better, I'll stick with what 90% of the computer users on Planet Earth are using.

PC509

dynamik wrote: »

Why does everyone act like Vista is nothing more than a UI update?

There are dozens of new features, and some are pretty cool. If all your job requires of you is basic work with Word, Excel, and a web browser, I could see those not making a difference. For more advanced users, especially mobile users, there are beneficial additions.

Thank you. I was reading the posts in here, and was about to write the same thing. There seem to be a lot of people that either spread the rumors without really using the OS, or that used the OS for a day or two and made generalizations about it.

I CANNOT go back to XP. I don't use legacy programs, though. If I were to use a program that wasn't supported by the programmers anymore, I'd find a new program to do the job.

For basic use, XP (or even ME, for those that like the older OS's ), is just fine. Heck, even go with Mint Linux or Ubuntu for basic needs.

Vista has a LOT of features (and 7 greatly improves on those, especially from an enterprise point of view) that no one has mentioned.

I use Windows 7 exclusively, and it is wonderful. Never had a single crash. Compatibility is awesome. Vista is great, and 7 is better. 7 was built on Vista because they wanted to keep compatibility with the older OS (as usual with MS). XP to Vista wasn't as good compatibility wise because the programmers used poor programming technique. You shouldn't need admin rights to use a notepad style program (example only, not a real one).

Sure, Vista has it's issues, but none like many claim. And many do call it a failure. 50% of that is because of the misinformation that is spreading around from misinformed people. The other 50% are from enterprises that don't want to upgrade their infrustructure to support the new OS. Yes, the OS hardware requirements are higher (anyone notice how every OS released raises the HW requirements?), and they don't want to spend a fortune on something that works fine with XP. I think Windows 7 will be quite a bit better in this regard. It works a lot faster on similar hardware as Vista.

Vista has it's good points and it's bad points, but a lot of people give it **** where it isn't deserved. It's like bitching that you don't like horses because they are too tall.... They are awesome, but if you only need a pony, get a pony.

JDMurray

PC509 wrote: »

XP to Vista wasn't as good compatibility wise because the programmers used poor programming technique.

The XP-to-Vista transition is difficult for people because of the considerable differences in the GUIs, not because Microsoft abandoned the "Windows NT Technology" of WinXP and re-wrote Longhorn from the ground up (which is why it took Vista over five years to be released).

Microsoft has repeatedly said that people who are still on Windows XP should wait for Windows 7 because it should be an easier trasnition than going to Vista. For people already on Vista, the transition to Windows 7 should be very easy (and it is).

HeroPsycho

JDMurray wrote: »

Until you write something better, I'll stick with what 90% of the computer users on Planet Earth are using.

You don't get it, do you? 90% of the population is falling for Microsoft's repeated rip offs over and over and over again... *raising arms level with shoulders* I'm a Microsoft zombie, tooooooooo....

Not that I think all Windows users made an unbiased decision to choose Windows over other OS's, but the general public, no matter which OS the vast majority ends up running with, wouldn't have done so.

JDMurray

HeroPsycho wrote: »

You don't get it, do you? 90% of the population is falling for Microsoft's repeated rip offs over and over and over again... *raising arms level with shoulders* I'm a Microsoft zombie, tooooooooo....

I see MS only as a capitalistic company trying to dominate a market, but you seem to have other ideas. So please, give me the details of your Microsoft conspiracy theory.

undomiel

Personally for me once I started using Vista the killer feature was the new start menu. I've seen people rip on it left and right but I absolutely love being able to get to whatever program I want with just a few keystrokes. No more navigating through Programs!

I do think one of the big things that Microsoft dropped the ball on (all marketing aside) was the horrendously slow file transfers. That should've been fixed before Vista shipped, or at the very least right after. Not having to wait until SP1.

Jordus

JDMurray wrote: »

Microsoft has repeatedly said that people who are still on Windows XP should wait for Windows 7 because it should be an easier trasnition than going to Vista. For people already on Vista, the transition to Windows 7 should be very easy (and it is).

Actually, Microsoft has repeatedly said that companies should still upgrade to Vista before going to Windows 7.

There is some pretty illogical reasoning behind this on a lot of areas, but they have said this a few times.

dynamik

JDMurray wrote: »

I see MS only as a capitalistic company trying to dominate a market, but you seem to have other ideas. So please, give me the details of your Microsoft conspiracy theory.

You need to spend more time in the MS forums JD. He's just joking around

undomiel wrote: »

Personally for me once I started using Vista the killer feature was the new start menu. I've seen people rip on it left and right but I absolutely love being able to get to whatever program I want with just a few keystrokes. No more navigating through Programs!

It's so simple, but that is huge for me as well. It's irritating trying to sort through all those programs when I'm back on XP.

undomiel wrote: »

I do think one of the big things that Microsoft dropped the ball on (all marketing aside) was the horrendously slow file transfers. That should've been fixed before Vista shipped, or at the very least right after. Not having to wait until SP1.

How to copy large files the fastest way in Windows? - Windows Live

Jordus wrote: »

Actually, Microsoft has repeatedly said that companies should still upgrade to Vista before going to Windows 7.

There is some pretty illogical reasoning behind this on a lot of areas, but they have said this a few times.

They get paid twice instead of once. It doesn't get more logical than that

HeroPsycho

JDMurray wrote: »

I see MS only as a capitalistic company trying to dominate a market, but you seem to have other ideas. So please, give me the details of your Microsoft conspiracy theory.

Bill Gates is funding his plot to hold the world ransom with freakin' sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their freakin' heads.

JDMurray

Jordus wrote: »

Actually, Microsoft has repeatedly said that companies should still upgrade to Vista before going to Windows 7.

Microsoft's advice for people who want to upgrade from WinXP now is to move to Vista rather than waiting for Windows 7. If people do not want to upgrade now, they can later to Windows 7. But there is just as much difficulty transitioning users from XP to Vista as there is from XP to Windows 7, so people would be better off waiting the few more months for Windows 7. I'm sure Microsoft and its shareholders would prefer that everyone buy licenses for both Vista and W7.

jibbajabba

If you don't like Vista / Windows 7 why do you even bother to post it and just don't stay out of threads like this ?

I get a bit tired of people flaming in EVERY forum where Vista is mentioned (and now Windows 7 too).

You hate Vista / W7 - fine, leave me alone and let me enjoy this OS as much as I want and get yourself XP,
You hate Microsoft - fine, leave me a lone and let me enjoy this OS as much as I want and get yourself Linux.

gorebrush

JDMurray wrote: »

Once again, Windows Vista was primarily a marketing failure, so they are giving people who decide that they don't like Windows 7 an easy downgrade path back to WinXP. This should keep people from talking too much needless trash about Windows 7 if they don't like it. The "Vista sucks" word-of-moth campaign by people who never even tried it had devastating effects on the long-term sales of Vista. MS doesn't want the same thing to happen with Windows 7.

Oh don't get me wrong, I agree with you entirely.

vCole

Does TechNet have the Windows 7 x64?

Jordus

JDMurray wrote: »

Microsoft's advice for people who want to upgrade from WinXP now is to move to Vista rather than waiting for Windows 7. If people do not want to upgrade now, they can later to Windows 7. But there is just as much difficulty transitioning users from XP to Vista as there is from XP to Windows 7, so people would be better off waiting the few more months for Windows 7. I'm sure Microsoft and its shareholders would prefer that everyone buy licenses for both Vista and W7.

I know, i was correcting you because you said it the other way around in your other post.

Yeah, im sure MS prefers that but those that have software assurance can run whatever version they want without extra $ and they even suggest it to them.

The entire purpose is that preparing your applications and processes for Vista would have more easily carried over to 7 than the XP to 7 stuff will.

Jordus

FadeToBright wrote: »

Does TechNet have the Windows 7 x64?

Yes, the beta is available for 32 and 64 on technet still.

Of course, if your technet subscription is still good once windows 7 is released you will get RTM copies as well.

jibbajabba

FadeToBright wrote: »

Does TechNet have the Windows 7 x64?

Indeed, mind you though, even though build 7077 is floating on the internet - MSDN and Technet "only" has build 7000 at the moment. Apparently RC1 will be released soon ish ..

Tyrant1919

The only thing keeping us from going 100% Vista is software compatability. Software vendors don't update their @$^%$@^% fast enough.

jibbajabba

Tyrant1919 wrote: »

The only thing keeping us from going 100% Vista is software compatability. Software vendors don't update their @$^%$@^% fast enough.

Trouble is, no company wants to work with Beta software. I remember a company was developing a piece of software for the new filesystem in Vista which Microsoft at the end removed again ...

Lee H

I think theres a striking defference between Vista and W7, my PC is one of the minority that does have Vista issues, but with W7 there are none, been using it for about 2-3 months with no problem attall

The nifty W7 features are really cool, auto resizing windows to fill half the screen is the most useful change, along with the new quick launch being neat and tidy

I use the 64bit version with 8 gig of ram, it runs Wanted PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jibbajabba

Lee H wrote: »

I think theres a striking defference between Vista and W7, my PC is one of the minority that does have Vista issues, but with W7 there are none, been using it for about 2-3 months with no problem attall

The nifty W7 features are really cool, auto resizing windows to fill half the screen is the most useful change, along with the new quick launch being neat and tidy

I use the 64bit version with 8 gig of ram, it runs Wanted PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agree to all of the above. I wasn't able to install Vista without Servicepack at all ... I had to wait for a SP1 slipstreamed version of Vista in order to install Ultimate without Bluescreens .. But yea - W7 is flawless, stable and just cool

Pash

JDMurray wrote: »

Windows 7 is Windows Vista with a newer shell and a few other performance and usability improvements. Using Vista as the bottom 80% of Windows 7 is how MS is able to get another turn of Windows out so quickly. Vista was largely a marketing failure rather than a technical failure (Vista is more of a technical annoyance, really).

I've been using the Windows 7 beta since it was first "leaked" and I like it quite a lot. I may actually move to it before the release of Windows 7 Service Pack 1.

Look, i am not trying to be petty or anything but isn't it double standards when a long standing moderator of these boards mentions "leaked" software. What makes you think MS wants you to beta test their software without going through the legitimate channels? Especially when a few post's down you mention Microsoft is a profit making business.

Back on topic: Yeh i been testing it at work, as a vista user at home (64bit Ultimate) I think I also appreciate windows 7 more. Its a move in the right direction and from a business perspective, how can any real systems admin not take notice when 2008 server R2 and W7 will both have powershell packaged as standard.

I will definitely look to upgrade when it go's retail.

JDMurray

Pash wrote: »

Look, i am not trying to be petty or anything but isn't it double standards when a long standing moderator of these boards mentions "leaked" software. What makes you think MS wants you to beta test their software without going through the legitimate channels? Especially when a few post's down you mention Microsoft is a profit making business.

I not following you in this.

"Leaking" is often done by a marketing department to bypass the formality of a managed beta testing program. It's about getting a new and (supposed) good product into the hands of the community of users a lot sooner. It's all about gaining or maintaining market share, and that's how our capitalistic business system works.

What did you think I meant?